(1.) The only question for consideration in this appeal is, whether there is a decree capable of execution as against Mulu. It appears that there was an attempt at house-breaking committed at the house of Mulu in 1919. Two persons were named in the first report made by Mulu at the police station, one of whom was Mohsham Ali Khan, the present appellant. Bhawani had accompanied Mulu when he had gone to the police station to make that report. Both the persons named in the report were originally convicted, but on appeal Mohsham Ali Khan was acquitted.
(2.) The suit which has given rise to this appeal was then brought by Mohsham Ali Khan for damages for malicious prosecution. It was decreed by the trial Court both against Mulu and Bhawani. Mulu did not appeal. Bhawani filed an appeal making Mohsham Ali Khan alone a party to it. Mulu subsequently appeared before the appellate Court and asked that his name should be added as a co-appellant, alleging that he had paid Rs. 16 to Bhawani of a joint appeal and that Bhawani had fraudulently kept his name out. Bhawani, however, denied that he had been paid any money. The application was, therefore, rejected.
(3.) The appellate Court then proceeded to hear the appeal and the conclusion at which it arrived was that there was no satisfactory evidence and that Mohsham Ali Khan had failed to establish that he had been falsely named through enmity. It allowed the appeal accordingly, and dismissed the suit of Mosham Ali Khan, and what is more significant, it set aside the judgment and the decree of the trial Court.